December 15-Cal Expo Analysis

by Al Cimaglia

December 15, 2017

The Friday night feature at Cal Expo rolls in Race 4, a fillies and mares Open Handicap with a $6,600 purse. The 0.20 Pick 4 sequence with a $30,000 guaranteed pool and a 16% takeout begins in Race 9. The Pick 4 will be my focus.

My Sunday selections at Rosecroft connected for a $17.80 exacta on a $2 wager. The race winner was my top pick, #6-Rock 'N Roll Jet who paid $5.40 to win and my second choice #7-Kiss A Dragon paid $4.20 to place.

Comments and selections below are based on a fast track.

Race 9

2-Melodies That Rock-Tough trip in last versus better, fits here and at 12-1 in the ML worth a swing.3-If You Say So-Kennedy's choice raced well in a quick pace, doesn't win often but this looks like a good spot. 7-Dickies Motel-Plano steers tonight and if pace is brisk, race could set up for this 9-year-old at a square price.

Race 10

2-Coastal Treasure-Tried to come from behind for a change and finished 2nd. Could be sitting on a big try.3-Windsun T Bird-Roland's choice hung in last and expecting better tonight.4-Surprisingly Sweet-Had a 56.3 back half to win and looks like a major player at this class.

Race 11

2-Tornado Henry-Twice beaten favorite is looking for 1st CalX win, will likely be bet again and should be in the mix.3-Cowboys Dirtyboots-Last wasn't best effort, but a return to previous 2 starts could mean a picture tonight.7-Lucky Ivan-Excuses in last 2 but had a 56.3 back half and could be very dangerous with a good trip.

Race 12

3-Hes A Navajo-Closed well off a slow pace in last and with good cover could sweep by at a square price.5-Real Roknrol-Program chalk steps up and was Lackey's choice, fits versus this group and best to respect.6-Crash And Burn-Comes off a dud but if races back to 12/2 victory could take a picture tonight. 7-Lilmessinaround-12-1 price play doesn't win much but Kennedy takes a 2nd swing and this isn't a group of All-Stars.

You May Also Like

12.14.2017

The disqualification of What The Hill in the Hambletonian is still not behind us. The connections of the apparent race winner are looking to overturn their disqualification and the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law (OAL) has scheduled to hear the case starting on January 23rd. Besides losing the winner's share of a $1,000,000 purse, What The Hill would probably win Horse of the Year honors if his Hambletonian finish stood-up. The owners have a gripe as besides the first place check the trotters value was also affected. Maybe the judges did make a mistake, but without question the biggest harness race of the year was disappointing in many ways. Beyond a questionable decision, what was most problematic was the process followed by the Meadowlands judges. A judge saying, they don't bother talking to drivers about a race incident because they don't trust them to tell the truth is a big concern. That's exactly the wrong picture to paint when trying to project a fair and honest sport.So many things in our society are based on trust. The entire world economy is based on trust. When the housing market crashed, besides a tremendous amount of wealth being lost, trust was destroyed. The process of buying and selling real estate was shown to be faulty. Once that happened people were fearful and looked to protect their assets rather than invest. It caused a terrible downward spiral in the stock market and other asset classes. One of the reasons harness racing doesn't have nearly the following of thoroughbreds is because generally the public doesn't trust races are run fairly. By its very nature a harness race can look fishy to those who don't understand the sport. A driver leaning back in the race bike, or keeping the lines taut can look to an untrained eye as if he is trying to slow down the horse. In fact, the opposite is true but more work needs to be done to educate new fans. Watching the scattered process during inquiries can result in diminished trust in the sport. That is probably the worst offshoot of the Hambletonian cluster. Why would anyone want to bet on a harness race if the judges really believe the drivers lie to them? That must matter to some betting the races, because it signals a flawed process of regulation. Another problem is race tracks follow their own methods when there is an inquiry. Some judges will speak to drivers and some don't. This all can be resolved with everyone following the same rules. But on the biggest stage on Hambo Day, with a television audience tuning in a poor image of the sport was projected.A driver's first obligation is to represent the interests of the owner. That doesn't mean they should lie, but it could mean they would be reluctant to volunteer information. That's where the responsibility of the judges needs to come into play, to display to the public there is honesty and integrity involved in harness racing. It's the judges who should question, analyze and discern before deciding. Because their decision has an impact on owners, breeders and the betting public as well as the drivers.Frank Antonacci trainer of International Moni, and trainer John Butenschoen who had three entries in the Hambo, both confirmed the same story. They spoke to judges at the Meadowlands who stated they don't talk to drivers during an inquiry. The underlying reason of not trusting the drivers is what still bothers me four months later. Possibly my feelings are in the minority but as a trader back in 2007 I saw first hand what happens when trust is destroyed. Maybe by the end of January an official conclusion will be made concerning the the 2017 Hambletonian. But I do wonder how long it will take for the betting public to trust harness racing is operating with their best interest in mind. Check me out on Twitter, @AlCimaglia.

8.17.2017

Since the 92nd running of the Hambletonian on August 5th, there have been many articles written which identified the curious circumstances surrounding the outcome of the race. There's a bigger focus because the Hambo is the signature event for harness racing. It was televised on a national basis which also means the hit or miss nature of disqualifications was more of an embarrassment. It was a curious display of what could go wrong when a rule book is written in watercolors.
The biggest take away should be the sport has no leadership to speak of, and doesn't have a unified rule book in place. What struck me as a critical issue wasn't only what horse should have been disqualified or not. It's the scattered nature for decision making and that the betting interest of the public is not given the proper importance. Very little regard has been given to the people who support the sport and bet on the outcome of races.
Race tracks seem to do whatever they think is correct. Some judges-stewards will speak to a driver after a race when there is an inquiry and discuss a possible disqualification, other don't. Most concerning is the reason that has been given to not speak to drivers in an inquiry situation. What has been reported about the judges at the Meadowlands is they don't bother to ask drivers their opinion because they do not trust them to tell the truth.
What The Hill, driven by David Miller crossed the wire first but was disqualified and placed ninth for interfering with Guardian Angel As in the stretch. Miller contends Guardian Angel As drifted out slightly and that was the reason for the contact. A case could be made the favorite, Devious Man driven by Andy Miller drifted out as well as he was to the inside. Also, the race winner Perfect Spirit appeared to be in more than one lane going towards the finish line. In the end, the apparent winner What The Hill was the only one punished and placed ninth. This resulted in second-place finisher Perfect Spirit being crowned Hambletonian Champion. The judges were in a tough spot because there appeared to be a series of events involved and they took it upon themselves to decide in a short time without any input from participants.
International Moni, the second favorite, was interfered with on the first turn, went off stride and was knocked out of the race. At first there wasn't an acknowledgement by the Meadowlands judges of interference by Victor Gio It, driven by Yannick Gingras to International Moni Maker. Later the race chart was changed to show International Moni made an interference break.
Then in a move which defies logic the judges didn't disqualify Victor Gio It even though they classified the break of International Moni as occurring because of interference. Evidently, the judges felt they could call an interference break without disqualifying the horse that caused the interference. By the judges not asking Gingras for his account, it was only natural for him to keep his mouth shut.
Gingras has an obligation to the owners of Victor Gio It, first and foremost, and he isn't going to put them in jeopardy of losing purse money. The driver of International Moni, Scott Zeron did call the judges later and gave his account but it fell on deaf ears for the most part. David Miller and other drivers were never contacted by the judges.
In my view, if Gingras is asked by the judges he answers honestly. Supposedly, Gingras apologized to Domenico Cecere the head trainer of Lindy Farms, breeder of International Moni immediately after the race. That account was given by Frank Antonacci the trainer of International Moni. In any event there was no risk in asking Gingras for his opinion.
So, the driver who has direct control over the horse isn't trusted by the Big M judges to honestly state the facts. But the betting public shouldn't let that deter them from placing a wager on a race in which a driver is an integral part. No person has a bigger influence on the outcome of a harness race than a driver.
Going a step further, a driver has an obligation to represent the owner, which precludes them from coming forward voluntarily with their views. So they should be questioned, and in a race of this magnitude if they won't tell the truth then, why would anyone trust them enough to place a bet on a race? This isn't a $15,000 claiming race in February, this was the Hambletonian which has more media coverage and TV cameras involved than any other harness race. It would seem likely a driver would state the facts accurately.
The irony of it all is drivers are called at some race tracks by the judges-stewards to give their account of the circumstances surrounding an inquiry. This takes place in cheap claiming events, but not the case at the Meadowlands, the mecca of harness racing in the United States.
If you are confused don't be because this is exactly what can happen when there isn't anyone in charge of the show. In harness racing every state, every race track handles rules as they see fit.
So, sometimes it's okay to talk to a driver and sometimes it isn't, but rest assured it's always a good thing to place a bet.
Follow me on Twitter for more harness racing analysis, picks and insights > @AlCimaglia.